Psychological Development and Education ›› 2021, Vol. 37 ›› Issue (4): 457-464.doi: 10.16187/j.cnki.issn1001-4918.2021.04.01

    Next Articles

Cognitive Development of Dual Vertical Space and Size Metaphors of Occupational Prestige Concepts in 3 to 5-year-old Children

HE Xiaoling1, CHEN Jun2, LIU Ling1, ZHANG Tian1   

  1. 1. School of Public Administration, Nanchang University, Nanchang 330031;
    2. School of Psychology, Guangdong Key Laboratory of Mental Health and Cognitive Science, Center for Studies of Psychological Application, South China Normal University, Guangzhou 510631
  • Published:2021-07-26

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Abstract: Images with high-and low-prestige occupational characters were placed above and below a vertical space, and silhouette images of large and small characters were studied to explore the development law of occupational prestige cognition as well as dual vertical space and size metaphors of occupational prestige in children aged 3 to 5 years. Through two experiments and comprehensive analysis, it was determined that metaphor-comprehension ability of occupational prestige and the conceptual metaphor of the positive pole with high occupational prestige, such as ‘up’, begin to emerge at the age of 3 years. At the age of 4 years, children's metaphorical comprehension ability of occupational prestige is developed and has formed multiple metaphorical abilities with high occupational prestige, such as ‘up’ and ‘big’, and low occupational prestige, such as ‘down’ and ‘small’. The ability of a 5-year-old to use multiple metaphors for career prestige is further enhanced. Children between the ages of 3~5 years have a positive advantage in metaphor processing of professional prestige. The development of children's ability to understand multiple vertical space and size metaphors of occupational prestige is yet to be synchronised. Moreover, the development of vertical space metaphors of occupational prestige is better than that of size metaphors.

Key words: 3~5 years old children, occupational prestige, dual metaphors, cognitive development

CLC Number: 

  • B844
Aboud, F. (2003). The formation of in-group favoritism and out-group prejudice in young children:Are they distinct attitudes? Developmental Psychology, 39(1), 48-60.
Asch, S., & Nerlove, H. (1960). The development of double-function terms in children. In B. Kaplan, & S. Wapner (Eds.), Perspectives in psychological theory (pp. 47-60). New York:International Universities Press.
Blaker, N. M., & van Vugt, M. (2014). The status-size hypothesis:How cues of physical size and social status influence each other. In J. T. Cheng, J. L. Tracy, & C. Anderson(Eds.).The Psychology of Social Status(pp.119-137). New York, NY:Springer.
Casasanto D. (2009). Embodiment of abstract concepts:Good and bad in right-and left-handers. Journal of Experimental Psychology:General, 138(3), 351-367.
Clark, E. (1972). On the child's acquisition of antonyms in two semantic fields. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 11(6), 750-758.
de la Vega, I., Dudschig, C., De Filippis, M., Lachmair, M., & Kaup, B. (2013). Keep your hands crossed:The valence-by-left/right interaction is related to hand, not side, in an incongruent hand-response key assignment. Acta Psychologica, 142(2), 273-277.
Holbrook, C., & Fessler, D. (2013). Sizing up the threat:The envisioned physical formidability of terrorists tracks their leaders' failures and successes. Cognition, 127(1), 46-56.
Lakens, D. (2012). Polarity correspondence in metaphor congruency effects:Structural overlap predicts categorization times for bipolar concepts presented in vertical space. Journal of Experimental Psychology:Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 38(3), 726-736.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (Eds.).(1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
Li, V., Spitzer, B., & Olson, K. (2014). Preschoolers reduce inequality while favoring individuals with more. Child Development, 85(3), 1123-1133.
Lourenco, S. F., Bonny, J. W., & Schwartz, B. L. (2016). Children and adults use physical size and numerical alliances in third-party judgments of dominance. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1-10.
Mcgonigle, B., & Chalmers, M. (1984). The selective impact of question form and input mode on the symbolic distance effect in children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 37(3), 525-554.
Özçalişkan, S. (2005). On learning to draw the distinction between physical and metaphorical motion:Is metaphor an early emerging cognitive and linguistic capacity? Journal of Child Language, 32(2), 291-318.
Piaget, J. (1962). The relation of affectivity to intelligence in the mental development of the child. Bulletin of the Menninger Clinic, 26(26), 129-137.
Proctor, R., & Cho, Y. (2006). Polarity correspondence:A general principle for performance of speeded binary classification tasks. Psychological Bulletin, 132(3), 416-442.
Rubio-Fernández, P., & Grassmann, S. (2015). Metaphors as second labels:Difficult for preschool children? Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 45(4), 931-944.
Schubert, T. (2005). Your highness:Vertical positions as perceptual symbols of power. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(1), 1-21.
Schubert, T., Waldzus, S., & Giessner, S. (2009). Control over the association of power and size. Social Cognition, 27(1), 1-19.
Siltanen, S. A. (1986). "Butterflies are rainbows?":A developmental investigation of metaphor comprehension. Communication Education, 35(1), 1-12.
Stites L., & Özçalişkan Ş. (2013). Developmental changes in children's comprehension and explanation of spatial metaphors for time, Journal of Child Language, 40(5), 1123-1137.
Treiman, D. J. (1976). A standard occupational prestige scale for use with historical data. The Journal of Interdisciplinary History, 7(2), 283-304.
Vosniadou, S., Ortony, A., Reynolds, R. E. & Wilson, P. T. (1984). Sources of difficulty in children's understanding of metaphorical language. Child Development, 55, 1588-1606. Reprinted in M. B. Franklin & S. S. Barten (Eds.) (1988), Child Language:A Reader. Oxford, England:Oxford University Press.
胡德明. (2003). 儿童空问维度形容词发展顺序的理论解释. 世界汉语教学, 65(3), 61-66.
李春玲. (2005). 当代中国社会的声望分层——职业声望与社会经济地位指数测量. 社会学研究, 20(2), 74-102.
李其维. (2008)."认知科学"与"第二代认知科学"刍议.心理学报, 40(12), 1306-1327.
卿石松. (2019). 中国性别收入差距的社会文化根源——基于性别角色观念的经验分析. 社会学研究, 34(1), 106-131.
唐佩佩, 叶浩生, 杜建政. (2015). 权力概念与空间大小:具身隐喻的视角. 心理学报,47(4), 514-521.
尉建文,赵延东. (2011). 权力还是声望?——社会资本测量的争论与验证. 社会学研究, 26(3), 64-83.
许晓迪. (2010). 现代汉语社会地位的空间隐喻实验研究(硕士学位论文). 上海师范大学.
殷融, 苏得权, 叶浩生. (2013). 具身认知视角下的概念隐喻理论. 心理科学进展,21(2), 220-234.
[1] DU Xuan, LIN Jiayi, CHEN Lijing. The Space-time Metaphor of the Children and Teenagers [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2020, 36(5): 513-519.
[2] ZHANG Jia-hui, XIN Tao, CHEN Xue-feng. Cognitive Development of 4-5 years old:The Positive Impact of Appropriate Kindergarten Enrollment Age [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2011, 27(5): 475-483.
[3] ZHANG Li, XIN Zi-qiang, LI Hong, LIN Chong-de. Detecting Discontinuity of Cognitive Development: Routes and Methods [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2010, 26(1): 100-106.
[4] HUANG Hong qing, ZHANG Wei. Cognitive Inhibition and Its Development in Directed Forgetting [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2003, 19(1): 44-48.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!
Copyright 2018 © Editorial office of Psychological Development and Education
Supported by Beijing Magtech Co.Ltd